SocialistStories حكايات اشتراكية

This book (127pg) discusses a very important, but often ignored event in history: the wholesale slaughter of communists and working class sympathizers in Indonesia. The name of the book "Constructive Bloodbath in Indonesia" is the authors sarcastic way of pointing out this lack of interest in what can only be described as a horrible, inhuman massacre. Started by the military, with the support, backing, and encouragement of amerikkka and britain, the massacre was carried out by different elements of society, all with clear instructions from the top and under the general control of the military. The main perpetrators besides the military itself were nationalist youth groups and reactionary islamic groups, both of whose political philosophies to this day focus an inordinate amount of hatred towards communists.

There are many important points that this book makes, either directly or indirectly, and many of them have a direct bearing on the present political situation. First of all, one of the things that really stood out to me about this book (since I read it recently), was the extent of the involvement of the islamist groups in the slaughter, in fact many of the groups which organized lynch parties armed with knives and sticks to kill communists (of course killing many non-political people in the process), went on to rule the country when Suharto left power. This is very important to point out, because it is not rare nowadays to hear arab leftists talk peaceably about islamists in their country, about how they hope to convert some to their side, or how they don't feel they are a threat, etc...But these leftists don't seem to be able to differentiate between being religious personally, and accepting a reactionary political philosophy that pretends to come from a holy book. Accepting normal people who believe in one religion or another is natural and logical, but politically-involved religious hypocrites are not just religious people, they are reactionaries who already have a political ideology they follow, and in the end they are enemies of equality and justice, and will act violently against those who resist hypocrisy and oppression.

Another point to be made on this general subject is the admiration for youth movements which started in the 60's and 70's and is still unfortunately with us. I would like to add a brief quote from a speech of Isaac Deutscher's here that is very appropriate: “Any political movement which bases itself only on students in characterized by a basic political and moral instability. The students now [1967] play a very big role in various countries all over the world. Don't forget that behind the slaughter of several hundred thousand unarmed and defenseless communists, men, women, and children, in Indonesia, the driving force was the students...I remember also a time when the students were in the vanguard of fascist movements in Europe. I remember the students in my native country who vented all their political energy on forcing through the segregation of the Jews in the University of Warsaw. The role of students is transient. They are not a stable element in society; they are, if you allow me to use this despised term, ideologically unstable.”

Finally, there is the biggest question that comes to mind: How did the PCI, the biggest (non-ruling) communist party in the world at the time come to be wiped out by force? This is a very complex question, but I will delve into this issue briefly. The PCI at this point was not following the Soviet line anymore, but had switched to the Chinese line, which although giving it more freedom to act on its own, didn't at all free it from the stifling effects of stalinism. The PCI had compromised itself early on after WWII by joining forces, in a way, with Sukarno and assuming that they could string their partnership on long enough to be completely sure of taking power. But the military was always opposed to the PCI, and although Sukarno was outspokenly anti-imperialist, he was still of the Nasser-type nationalist/"leftist" dictator who was politically unreliable and in the end an enemy of real socialist revolution. The amerikkkans hated Sukarno and thus they funded the army directly, and were able to get it to be more loyal to them than to Sukarno. This is a point which never can be stressed enough: if as revolutionaries we put any faith or hope in a government that is not directly in control of the people, or unite with nationalist or liberal elements, not only will we suffer for it with our own blood, but the cause of the revolution will be fatally, if not mortally wounded.

Enjoy comrades: